Polish Wilga in Houston TX

Arthur,

The F-15 was designed from ther start as an air superiority fighter! dog-fighting and manueverability was the main goal of its design. Although the radar and missiles were considered the strong-point of its mission, ie, it could shoot and forget, and hopefully avoid a dog-fight, but if it had to it will turn with the best of them. Remember the F-16 was designed a few years later and its high G capability was awesome, but essentially it was designed as a cheap all-mission jet, that did alot but exceled at none. Yes, I’ve seen many Migs up close, I spent alot of time in the Soviet Union back in the late 1980’s as well as Red Flag events where we have an extensive museum of Russian hardware, used to be classified, no more. PS the Eagle can pull up to 9G, I have direct proof of this, from numerous friends who fly it. But they would rather pickle an AMMRAM at 30 miles out and avoid a dog-fight.

I know very little about modern paraffin burners in general, and even less about Russian ones.

Am I right in remembering that when the Yanks got their hands on the defected MiG 25 they were staggered at the amount of steel in the construction?

Shouldn’t be surprised really, I suppose. I seem to recall that the limit for most aluminium alloys is around Mach 2.3 due to heat rise.

TTP,

The Eagle wasn’t really designed with maneuvrability in mind (6.33G was the limit for the first production models, which was worse better than the F-4’s) but performance. Speed (it’s still the West’s fastest fighter, though as always it’s maximum speed is more of an advertising trick rather than an operational feature). It is no brick in a dogfight, but this wasn’t a fighter ment to dance like an F-16 or F-5. Like the Foxbat, the Eagle design was the easiest solution for a two-engined high-powered relatively low-drag no-lifting-fuselage fighter.

Although if you count in the construction, i agree with you that nothing is comparable to the MiG-25. I don’t know if you have ever seen one from up close, but that massive one-piece bathtub fuselage is one impressive piece of engineering. I did read Belenko’s book, but (as you might guess) i found it a bit too politically colored to be a good read. Although there were interesting details in it about flight training in Russia – even though various (ex-) Soviet pilots i’ve spoken thought a lot of it to be BS. Oh, and that red star as my avatar is generally thought to represent the star on the Heineken label. Just in case you were wondering. 😀

Arthur,

Its actually nice to chat with you about aircraft instead of politics!
Your right , the intake design on the A-5 and the Mig-25 are similar because those engines needed alot of air, ditto for the F-15, but there is a huge difference between the Mig-25 and the Eagle. The Eagle was strictly designed for air to air combat, it is a dogfighter, where as the Mig was an interceptor, so it had those 2 huge engines so it could climb like hell and catch up to the B-70 Valkyre, it is not a dog-fighter. We never built the B-70 but the Russians had to counter the threat with the 25. I’m sure you knew this. The Mig made a great recon platform with its high alt/high speed capabilities. There is a good book called “Mig Pilot” Its about the Russian -25 pilot who defected to Japan, I read it when I was 15 alot of political BS but interesting reading if you like the Foxbat. By the way my first choice out of Pilot Training was an F-15, awesome aircraft even after 31 years in service.

Originally posted by TTP
Arthur,

Take a good look at the North-American Vigilante, first flew in the late 1950’s, The Mig 25 and the F-15 are only similar in that they have twin-tails, very different jets

True, the Vigilante is rather similar to the MiG-25 and in fact might well have inspired the intake of the Foxbat. As far as the F-15 and the MiG-25 are similar, i think i have to disagree with you. I think the similarity between the F-15 and the Foxbat is illustrative that certain requirements and specifications almost by definition lead to a certain shape of aircraft.

Arthur,

Take a good look at the North-American Vigilante, first flew in the late 1950’s, The Mig 25 and the F-15 are only similar in that they have twin-tails, very different jets

The Li-2 is the license built DC-3.

As for the F-15 being copied… yeah, sure. When the F-15 flew, Russian aircraft designers flew back in time and developed the MiG-25 which then flew ten years prior to the Eagle.

And while the Buran looks quite a bit like the American shuttle, it must be noted that it took an independent development path and that it’s actually a whole different system despite the external similarities. You won’t find engines in the Buran, while the Shuttle has them.

Just to throw a spanner in the works was the “2” the Li-2 which I believe was the Dak copy/licence build?

Still waiting for royalties for the Nene.

The Russian B-29 copy is the Tu-4 Bull… not that far out 🙂

I don’t think the Tu160/RockwellB1B is a very good example the Tu160 is much larger and justs has the same general layout. If it was copied only in a very loose manner. A better example is Tu144 and concorde where spying was involved in gaining information. Also B-29 and Tu-2(I think) which was adirect copy after the war. Just out of inteest why do they all seem to be Tupolev aircraft?

LOL Steve! 🙂 Think we’ve all had some experience with the good looking wierd ones (aeroplanes ofcourse…;))

Originally posted by Ant Harrington
it’s a wierd but good looking bird.

You talking about my ex…?

Originally posted by Ant Harrington
I remember standing at the top of a beach and seeing one… down at eye level just a few feet away. It was an impressive enough sight,but the growl… at close quarters is something to experience in itself. 🙂

That seals it. You ARE talking about my ex! 🙂

Hi China,
I can’t prove it,but I don’t think the Wilga was based on any Western design.Although it’s true the Russians copied alot of Western stuff,it was generally in advanced technical areas where they had limited knowledge of thier own and had to follow a Western example,eg Tu160/RockwellB1B.There is also the ‘design conclusions’ argument,ie that two design teams would occasionally come up with the same solution to a similar specification. These cases of Soviet copying are in fact alot rarer than many like to think,the Russians in particular being perfectly capable of designing some excellent aircraft without the need to copy.If you take a look at Bill Gunston’s Encyclopedia of Russian Aircraft, you’ll be amazed how much of the time the Soviets were actually ahead of us!I’d say we were kidding ourselves that the Communist nations needed to copy our own designs.
I should also point out that the Wilga was almost entirely Polish,aside from the Ivchenko radial engine,although I think even that was Polish built,so accusations of Russian copying don’t really count.
Thanks for the pic of the Wilga,it’s a wierd but good looking bird. I remember standing at the top of a beach and seeing one doing some banner towing right down at eye level just a few feet away. It was an impressive enough sight,but the growl of that Ivchenko at close quarters is something to experience in itself. 🙂

I came across a picture of a Stinson liason plane in an older FlyPast. It said that Convair had followed up on the design for the STOL…

Based on that.. I found that Convair made the L13.

Here is a link to images of one in Canada….

http://www.angelfire.com/wa/drdan71/avarlingtonstol.html

Sure looks like a Wilga… The Soviets used to copy our designs a lot (C-5, F15, shuttle, etc) I wonder if the Wilga was a copy of the L13?